Category Archives: Trolls

It’s “post about Brett Kimberlin” day. Most of my posts are pulled rather spontaneously and inartfully from my nether regions and published on the same day. This time, I actually started research the day before, thinking I’d get a fuller picture and maybe even a new nugget of info.

Forgive my flippancy; this is serious stuff. I’m only making light of my own confusion. The way this guy likes to destroy lives is no laughing matter.

The details of how he came to be entangled with Patrick Frey (Patterico), Aaron Walker (Worthing), Mandy Nagy (Liberty Chick) and a dude named Socrates, well they are making my eyes swim. And I haven’t even gotten to Walker’s megapost yet!

So I’m going to defer to thesepeople at theselinks, if you would like to see a bigger picture. I will stick to enumerating why I call Brett Kimberlin a Very Bad Actor. Then I’ll sit back and see if he tries to sue me or some such.

A 1985 challenge to the withholding of records by the Department of the Treasury and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Mr. Kimberlin wanted information that included a list of telephone numbers. The appellate court concluded that info would constitute “an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” The court explained, “The record fails to reflect any benefit which would accrue to the public from disclosure of this document and Kimberlin’s self-serving assertions of government wrongdoing and coverup do not rise to the level of justifying disclosure.”

A 1986 appeal of the dismissal of his Privacy Act violation claim. Apparently, it was not okay for his prison case manager (Leddy) to tell his probation officer (Gahl) that Kimberlin was sending money outside the prison from his commissary account. Okey-dokey. The dismissal of the case was affirmed, and the court noted, “Kimberlin’s claim to a property interest is totally lacking in merit.”

In 1993, Kimberlin appealed the district court’s dismissal of his second petition . . . alleging that “respondent, United States Parole Commission . . . violated his due process rights by vindictively redetermining his parole release date . . . .” In particular, the court found that “As for Kimberlin’s allegations about Vice President Quayle supposedly creating an appearance of political vindictiveness in the Commission’s decisions, the district court correctly concluded that Kimberlin, not the Commission, created this appearance. He has neither proven nor alleged that the Commission’s decisions were actually influenced in any way by his statements about the Vice President — indeed, Kimberlin’s counsel did not mention Quayle during oral argument. In the absence of proof or an allegation of actual vindictiveness, no lawful basis exists to set aside the Commission’s sentence . . . .” (emphasis mine)

Also in 1993, Kimberlin alleged that “Quinlan and Miller, in their individual capacities, conspired to violate and in fact violated Kimberlin’s rights under the first and fifth amendments to the United States Constitution by denying him, respectively, access to the press and due process of law . . . .” The court noted in this case, “In sum, Kimberlin relies only on inference and weak circumstantial evidence, notably the timing of events, to support his claim of unconstitutional detention by Quinlan and Miller; he has produced no direct evidence of unconstitutional motive for any of his detentions as required . . . .”

In Kimberlin v. Dewalt, 12 F. Supp. 2d 487 (1998), Kimberlin challenged the revocation of his parole. The court denied Kimberlin’s challenge, stating that “Clearly a ‘rational basis’ exists for requiring petitioner to pay a civil debt to his crime victim. Petitioner has a lengthy criminal history. Despite his high earnings, he failed to show any good faith by paying his crime victim.To permit petitioner to profit from his crimes (by receiving royalties from book sales) without also requiring compensation to his victim would clearly promote public disrespect for the law . . . .”

“Indeed, Kimberlin is such a talented songwriter, both musically and lyrically, that he can pull off what so many other well-intentioned performers are unable to. His songs are creative, intelligent, witty, and poignant, while retaining the musical qualities that make great rock songs – energy, melody and power. Moreover, he has a Motzartian ability to write entire songs on the spot –”a gift from God,” he says . . . .”

That voice sure sounds like Ron Brynaert’s. I’ve got @ronbryn’s Twitter feed in another tab right now, and denial tweets are coming in fast and furious, even though his threatening tweets to @Patterico are right on the Blaze article.

Meanwhile, I am still living the happy-go-lucky life of the not-yet-hunted-nor-harrassed conservative blogger. I’ve even finally begun to try out this wild thing they call The Twitter.

Wee! Twitter is kinda fun. Older Son recently chose the movie “Not Evil Just Wrong” for his afternoon educational viewing. When he ranted, with eyes aglow, about environmental politics at the dinner table, I joyfully tweeted about it, throwing in the movie creator’s twitter name.

On to the last topic of the week. Short Timer has been kind enough to elaborate on the issue of women in combat. His wisdom needs repeating, for this reason:

Even dyed-in-the-wool, military-loving conservatives often don’t understand what the big deal is about letting women try their hand at Ranger School or Marine Infantry School. We’re all feminists now, in today’s culture, you know? If you haven’t had the military experience, it’s hard to understand the real problems involved.

Short Timer thoroughly explains the problems here. Should you be pressed for time, here are the cliffnotes:

“If the standards are kept as high, women won’t pass. If there’s a 75% pass rate for men, and a 10% pass rate for women, the bureaucrat social-engineer leftist political[ly]-correct hack who came up with this idea will, as always, refuse to accept that men and women are different. And the test will be changed. . . . The instructors will be viewed as sexist . . . good ol’ boys and face retribution at the hands of the social engineers. The loss will be to the country, to security (one of the few legitimate functions of government), to the Marines and Rangers, to the men who pass, and to the women who actually could pass without the standard being lowered.”

“No one wants to teach a class of students that starts making EEO complaints. . . . It disrupts the class, and means the instructor has to walk on eggshells. A good instructor won’t want to be there – he can’t make the course difficult enough to prepare the candidates for their careers as Rangers or Marine combat arms MOSes. He can’t ask for the same level of performance when someone can’t give it – and washing someone out who has a (as a horribly politically incorrect coworker once said) “career enhancement device” – isn’t much of an option without facing retribution from higher-ups, bureaucrats, EEO, and harassment charges. There are plenty of people when faced with difficulty who will take the easy way out, and claiming harassment or unfair treatment is an easy way to pass. It’s hell for the instructors and dissuades good instructors from ever signing on. The knowledge base there is lost.”

Please do read the whole thing. To anyone who questions whether instructors might keep their mouths shut rather than breaching the Code of Political Correctness in order to criticize a female candidate, I give you Exhibit A:

Well, that’s all the news from this ‘lil nowhere section of the blogosphere. Normally, I might say “Happy Blogging” to all you folks, but tonight I say, “Safe Blogging! Night-night! Don’t let the leftist bugs bite!”

A common theme heard in the No One household, as you can imagine, is how unbelievably, mind-bogglingly and stupendously spoiled some of “The 99%” sound when compared to the 1% who serve in the military.

The folks at that website, www.rangerup.com, included an anonymous essay that will knock your socks off. I hope they don’t mind if I paste a large chunk here:

“I remember the day I found out I got into West Point.

My mom actually showed up in the hallway of my high school and waited for me to get out of class. She was bawling her eyes out and apologizing that she had opened up my admission letter. She wasn’t crying because it had been her dream for me to go there. She was crying because she knew how hard I’d worked to get in, how much I wanted to attend, and how much I wanted to be an infantry officer. I was going to get that opportunity.

That same day two of my teachers took me aside and essentially told me the following: ‘Nick, you’re a smart guy. You don’t have to join the military. You should go to college, instead.’

I could easily write a tome defending West Pont and the military as I did that day, explaining that USMA is an elite institution, that separate from that it is actually statistically much harder to enlist in the military than it is to get admitted to college, that serving the nation is a challenge that all able-bodied men should at least consider for a host of reasons, but I won’t.

What I will say is that when a 16 year-old kid is being told that attending West Point is going to be bad for his future then there is a dangerous disconnect in America, and entirely too many Americans have no idea what kind of burdens our military is bearing.”

The essay continues at length, so go read it. And buy a shirt! Looks like your ol’ blog bud Linda has just figured out half your Christmas shopping for you.

You’re welcome.

Oh, and read about the three guys behind Ranger Up–pretty awesome. Internet searches did not reveal a prior source for the .45% essay. Perhaps one of the three guys is the ‘Nick’ featured in it.

Oh, the internet searches did reveal that at least three other bloggers beat me to the punch, and they deserve a visit too, if’n you’ve got the time:

A Soldier’s Perspective, where blogger CJ speaks truth to power: “You know, I get fed up with the Occupy Wall Street idiots. I’ve been going around and around with some of them on Twitter and am convinced that this has nothing to do with corporate greed and everything to do with individual greed.”

CJ is kindly and patiently suffering a fool in the comment section. Anybody up for a game of whack-a-troll?

Eric at Threedonia will be proudly annoying liberal coworkers with this t-shirt on casual Fridays. Ha.

“Cleaning house” on my blog is easier than cleaning the really real house.

Speaking of which, here is our new place on base post:

Home is where the Navy sends you

I’m learning the terrain and starting to get my bearings. Leavenworth County has a home school service that I’m excited to stumble upon. All Slabbed Up is the place to go for an entirely euphoric meat coma. Folks at the Cushing Memorial Hospital ER are real nice, and while the application of dermabond does sting, it is still better than a shot (so saith the younger son).

On to the links:

Donald Sensing has shared a slogan T-shirt that sums up my entire political philosophy.

Mayrant and Rave has another example of our President’s disdain for the rule of law. Also, a pleasingly phonetic new acronym: CWTSYGO. (I can’t wait, either.)

PJMom reminds us how bad the education system has become, and she explains one of the reasons why: Howard Zinn.

Via the comment section of The Conservative Hideout comes the discovery of another great blog. Don’t let the name scare you off: Hookers and Booze. (Hmm. Actually, a fair number of you will be attracted by the title, won’t you?)

Please be sure to read Samuel L. Jackson, You’re My Only Hope. Comedic genius lies therein. I’m almost jealous enough to buy a pet snake for my family, in the hope that similar humor will ensue.

Via The Looking Spoon is the Bill Whittle video, “The End of The Beginning.” This video is the best I’ve seen from Mr. Whittle since Iconography.

Basically, he argues that only been three meta-changes have occurred in civilization’s entire history. He says that we are witnessing the third meta-change right now, and that’s why everything seems so crazy.

I needed to hear that today. Lemme tell you why, and then I’ll get back to the meta-change thing.

I am a stress monkey.

Virtually anything, and sometimes even nothing at all, can provoke anxiety. No posting for a few days: stress. Being unable to get everything done in a day: stress. I’ll stress over the way I stress if I think about it much longer. Is it rational? No. But I’m old enough to recognize that it’s not magically going away just because we declare it silly.

Facebook can be a minefield. Frequent moving creates many long-distance friendships. Most of these people never heard boo from me on politics when we interacted face-to-face. While no one has come out and said it, some of them probably think a body-snatcher now inhabits my body. After all, one day–without explanation–I began vomiting political links and opinions onto the news feed. Two years later, still vomiting.

The majority say nothing. A few folks appreciate the links. A few unfriended me. Sometimes, there is sarcasm. Worst of all: the vague statements. Was that sarcasm? Do I respond?

I’m not trying to annoy all the people I’ve befriended over the course of my life. I don’t want to upset anyone. And I certainly don’t want digital swarms of angry leftists buzzing all over the ‘net about me and my blog, like they just did to Da Tech Guy.

What the hell am I doing this for?

Well, the video embedded below reminded me. Oh, yeah. This nation went totally crazy town while me and my family were overseas. We get back home, turn on the radio, and I’m like, what? The government owns GM? Bailing out financial institutions? Passing humongous bills without reading them? Even crazier was the way no one seemed to notice. They need to notice. All the blogging, all the FB vomiting, started because no matter how much I hate the fray, I feel obliged to elbow my way into it.

Thank goodness for the local Tea Party. I am not the only one noticing the crazy train chugging to crazy town! Whew!

Back to Bill Whittle’s meta-change:

“We are now going from being ‘company men,’ to becoming dispersed, decentralized, independent, interconnected, free agents, because the industrial age is coming to a close, as the information age takes its place. And all of our economic structure is once again going back to being horizontal, independent, light, fast, agile, decentralized, local, smaller, cheaper. The old dinosaurs may totter for a while, but they will eventually fall.”

I sure hope he’s right. If you’ve got the nine minutes, the whole thing is well worth it:

Thanks, Mr. Whittle. I feel much better. Now I remember the other reason to blog. Essay writing is terrible fun.

Tom’s comments were specifically tailored for relevance to each particular post, and I only found three, so it’s not a total hatchet job. Still, it is . . . annoying. Why do folks cut and paste the same thing in multiple places? Do any of them really get paid to do this, as I’ve heard?

In two of the comments, Tom provided a reference for the stats: “Wolff, E. N. (2010). Recent trends in household wealth in the United States: Rising debt and the middle-class squeeze – an update to 2007. Working Paper No. 589. Annandale-on-Hudson, NY: The Levy Economics Institute of Bard College.”

A recent HuffPo piece cites the same source for the same statistics, while arguing that tax cuts for the rich don’t work because those evil rich people sleep on big bags of money no matter what we do, or something like that.

The only reason I mention the HuffPo piece is to point out the comment that pretty much sinks the whole “tax the rich more!” argument with one shot:

“Your logic is flawed. The Laffer curve is basic calculus that follows the law of diminishin­g returns. There is an optimum level of taxation that will maximize revenues at some tax rate. As rates go lower, actual revenue goes up.

You also talk about ‘fairness.’ That is casting a value judgement on the tax code. You are imposing your values-aga­inst the values of other individual­s. Things like ‘fairness’ are the domain of political scientists and not economists­. Positive vs normative economics.

There is a litany of research and mathematic­al foundation proving Laffer was correct. There is also Hauser’s Law, which states no matter what tax rates are, people end up paying about 19%. Once they get above that level. they begin to use the undergroun­d economy, and hide income.”

The name of this commenter is pointsnfigures. I wonder if this person is a contributor over at that totally clickworthy Points and Figures?

The commenters over at the blogprof also deal with the troll’s argument nicely.